Testing the TK Tar Baby

[Rosemary Ainslie]

@.99:
I think her computer must not be able to display images or something. Videos or spreadsheets either.

@Ainslie: try to use your conception of power and energy to explain my TinselKoil results. Just THINK about it for a moment, stop reacting.

How do you explain that I am drawing 3 or 4 amps at 120  VAC from the wall supply, yet I am making 30,000 VAC minimum at peak currents exceeding 10 amps, so hot it vaporizes COPPER and literally burns the very air gases in the plasma?

I have already told you this TK.  I am not at ALL interested in anything that you claim about anything at all, LEAST of all related to this tinsecoil thing.  I have NO idea what it is.  And I have NO intention of finding out.  It would BORE me - at BEST.  And TK.  My name is ROSEMARY or ROSIE or ROSIE POSE  or ROSIE POSIE.  My name is NOT Ainslie.  I am NOT your 'pal' or your 'colleague' that you can be that familiar with my family.  Persist if you must - but then you extend this quarrel of ours to a FAR, FAR, wider platform.  I'm not sure that you're fully aware of its extent.  And I seriously caution you that it takes your calumny to new levels of abuse together with a far wider circle that will clamour for your retraction.  But suit yourself.

Rosie Pose

Rosie Pose

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I think her computer must not be able to display images or something. Videos or spreadsheets either.

Not actually TK.  Our spreadsheet analyses are 500 000 data points long.  I'm not sure you'd like me to post that here.  And the images it displays are just fine.  It is a given that I can't always see those images but that's because I'm somewhat visually challenged.  But there's nothing that doesn't become apparent with the use of a good magnifying glass.  MUCH NEEDED. 

try to use your conception of power and energy to explain my TinselKoil results. Just THINK about it for a moment, stop reacting.

I've covered this point.  It hardly bears mention.

Rosie Pose

[Groundloop]

@GL: Cool!

That looks like an actual low-inductance CVR. May I suggest something?
You are actually adding significant inductance with those long wires. These may be needed on the gate and drain for oscillations but they defeat the purpose of using a noninductive shunt. I'd suggest that you peel back the insulation on the leads right at the body and try clipping your current-monitoring scope probe or filtered DMM right up as close as possible to the body of the resistor. You can compare waveforms taken there, with waveforms taken with the longer wires you've shown now.

Good hunting !!

(I've also used little screw-type terminal blocks for mosfet sockets... they work really well because you can get good clamping pressure on the leads. That way you can reconfigure, swap mosfets, compare different types, without soldering, and you'll get just as good a connection as soldering if you clamp down tightly.)

Is that the super heavy duty military-grade 9volt battery clip? I've never seen one that ...er... sturdy looking before.

TK,

Since most of my testing is with DC, I doesn't worry much about inductance. Yes, the RSHUNT is a 0,25 Ohm 25 Watt
no-inductive resistor (or very low inductance) with a tolerance of 1%. I agree that measuring close to the pins of the resistor
is needed when oscillating the circuit.

The 9 volt battery clip is homemade from a drained and used Duracell 9 volt battery. I take out the top and use the
bottom as cover for the wires. Did use some hot glue to keep it together. :-)

GL.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

PROVE IT. With references of course.

You want me to PROVE this?  That you misrepresent and misquote my work?  You do this with EVERY post where you do not reference its context or its date and thereby reserve the right to present statements OUT OF CONTEXT.  And you do it every time you represent anything at all about your tar baby technology when you ALLEGE that it relates to our own circuit apparatus.  It's technology is to ours what a toddlers best running performance is to an Olympic athlete's.  LOL

You cannot. Did I edit THIS, for example?
Now, if 1 watt = one Joule, and if 1 Joule = 1 watt per second...and the terms are INTERCHANGEABLE,  THEN AS I'VE EXPLAINED EARLIER, that means that you could substitute the Watt for the Joule in any equation, like this:

  1 Watt = 1 Watt Per Second.

Got that, Polly?

Nothing wrong with that reference.  '1 watt = 1 Joule and if 1 watt per second...?' WAIT A MINUTE.  Have you left something out?  Have you AGAIN attempted to misrepresent my quote?  Golly.  Who would have thought?  Didn't you just mention that you NEVER represent me - from that data base of yours?   

That reference is OLD, INAPPROPRIATE and NOR is it WRONG.  We've just covered ALL aspects of my argument and that would most certainly be the ONLY appropriate reference.  Don't give me that 'I never misrepresent anything'... bit

Rosie Pose.

[Groundloop]

@All,

Here is my BIAS current test so far:

TEST OF BIAS CURRENT

Input Power Supply was adjusted to 24.00 Volt and measured to 24.00 Volt.
The BIAS power supply was measured to 13.74 Volt.

Simulating the function generator positive pulse:

With positive BIAS the current through the circuit was 1.74 Ampere.

The BIAS current measured through the moving Iron ampere meter was
barly visible on the 1 ampere scale. I estimate approx. 0,05 Ampere.
Digital multimeter did show 0,09 Ampere BIAS current.

Simulating the function generator negative pulse:

With negative BIAS the current through the circuit was 0.17 Ampere.

The BIAS current measured through the moving Iron ampere meter was
on the 1 ampere scale approx. 0,19 Ampere.

CONCLUSION

With a positive function generator pulse simulation the BIAS current
was very small, approx. 0,05 ampere at 13.74 Volt. Gives 0,687 Watt.

The input current was very high at 1.74 ampere at 24 Volt. Gives 41,76 Watt.

With a negative function generator pulse simulation the BIAS current
was a little higher, approx. 0,19 ampere at 13.74 Volt. Gives 2,6106 Watt.

The input current was very low at 0.17 ampere at 24 Volt. Gives 4,08 Watt.

With a negative function generator pulse simulation then the circuit did
oscillate at 1.050 MHz. And the AC oscillation o-scoped at the MOSFET drains was 96 Vpp.

GL.